Developing: Pakistani Plane Escorted by UK Fighter Jets — 2 Men Arrested

Doc Thompson’s 24-hour radio marathon, ‘#24forok,’ continues until 9 am ET — Listen Live!

Government

George Will Questions If Women Are Strong Enough to Serve in Combat

Jan. 27, 2013 6:05pm Mytheos Holt

On today’s edition of ABC’s “This Week,” columnist George Will expressed some skepticism when asked about the prospect of women serving in combat.

In response to a question from moderator Martha Raddatz about the proposed change by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, which would allow women in combat provided they met the same physical fitness requirements as men, Will responded with a series of pointed comments about the dubiousness of holding women to such standards.

“That’s what they always say,” Will said. “Let me give you an example: ‘No Child Left Behind’ said, ‘We’re gonna have a hundred percent proficiency in reading and math by 2014, and the scary thing is we might, because the only way we’ll get there is by dumbing down the standards, which is actually under way. The question is, will we change the physical fitness requirements so that we don’t have a ‘disparate impact?’ Are we going to ‘gender norm’ the requirements?”

As an example of such “gender norming,” Will asked the question of what would happen if a 6’4”, 240 lb male marine was injured and needed to be carried back to safety, only to have the nearest available assistance come from a 5’4, 115 lb female marine.

“It’s relevant,” Will said.

“I’ve met a lot of combat medics, who repel down, who pick up big 6’4” marines, and take ‘em to safety. I just interviewed a woman,” Raddatz responded.

“That’s fine,” Will said. “But there are certain anatomical facts about upper body strength and stamina.”

In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (133)

DefyTYRANNY
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:46pm
Well there are many potential problems with women on the frontline. Big among them is the fact that men tend to treat women differently and also are hardwired to protect a woman. Well real men anyway. If a buddy gets hit in combat, you react one way. How will a soldier react when the nice girl next to him has her brains lying about? The dynamic will be Fubar. On the surface, some people are going to say “This is a great step for womens rights” and all that. There might be some women who want or think they want to serve in this capacity. I think this is a bad idea.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The Big Mick
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:55pm
  Then they need to MAN UP and PUT UNIT AND MISSION FIRST!
  What a ridiculous and cowardly excuse for losing a BATTLE or a WAR.
  MAN UP, folks, this is about some kind of “HeMan” CULTURE thing, some WARPED sense of Masculinity and Manly CULT.
  Some Locker Room “hit your opponent and score with the cheerleaders” Faux Macho Heifer Methane.
  I want KILLERS folks, don’t give a DAMN about YOUR need for Sexual Fulfillment or you Damn EGO or Self-Esteem.
  
  Report this comment
- FieldJudge
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 8:18pm
  Dear Liberals/Progressives, Yet another one of your unintended consequences unfolding?
  
  Your ‘progressive’ action to put females in combat means young women will be required to register with the government and drafted in the event there is a draft. To be ‘equal’ they should and will be drafted creating untold issues on our military. Yes, Israel requires women to serve but theirs is a totally different culture and situation.
  
  Imagine today’s many American females’ reactions when they learn what the Democrats they just re-elected have in store for them. I won’t get into the cluster of opposite sex issues this will create with our front line combat units. Please watch Glenn Beck question this issue well on Thursday or Friday’s TheBlazeTV program. He mentions some of the ways and different scenarios this decision could ultimately harm our US troops on the battle front.
  
  Report this comment
- drs1969
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 8:29pm
  It is a bad idea. When I was in the Army, 25 years ago, we’d go for a 3 mile run every morning. Half of the women would fall out after a mile or so. Nothing was said. If a man fell out, he got his *ss chewed out. Called a worthless POS, etc. Double Standard.
  It was sickening. It helped convince me that a man is stupid to stay in there. Especially if he’s white, too.
  
  Report this comment
- Wolf
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 10:04pm
  The libs want equality with men- give it to them. Make them meet the same standards without norming them down to a third grade level. If they can’t hack it, kcik them out as undesireables.
  
  Report this comment
- valiant1776
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 10:21pm
  It sounds good and all if they don’t lower standards or expectations or make special accommodations, but the problem is that when in actual combat, men tend to change their immediate responses in dire situations when women are put into factor, sometimes inadvertently. Male soldiers have already been reprimanded, while on official duty, for protecting a female soldier over a fellow male soldier. It’s a natural instinct for most men to want to protect a woman over a man. Male soldiers have already been disciplined in past times for putting the mission or other soldiers in jeopardy by not following exact protocol or orders, due to female soldiers. Women will not be the problem. Men will be the problem. While women might believe and be sure they can perform as well as men in combat, men will not act the same when put in combat with women. Women are and always will be a distraction to men. Of course, there are certain exceptional women meeting or exceeding the same standards requisite for men, but in general, this is not the case. Policy wise, this is not a good move for the military. This is just another move by liberals and progressives to continue feminizing and denigrating manliness in our nation. On another note, their goal is to loosen the traditional view of the family, to disintegrate the natural relationship between husband and wife, but most of all, to dissolve the important natural distinctive roles men and women play in society.
  
  Report this comment
- DefyTYRANNY
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 10:37pm
  Hehe, Big Mick you might want to cut back on the caffeine I think you might have an aneurysm there buddy.
  
  Report this comment
- Favored93
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:35pm
  The truth of this issue in my opinion is not “can a woman handle a gun or pass the PT tests,” but it is with the men … I assume every one here watched J-I Jane. In that movie there was a “rape” scene and in that scene the men in her unit would have given up “national secrets” or whatever to keep her from being raped. The “rapist” then told the rest of the unit (who was their instructor not the enemy fyi) that the problem was not her but them because they were more concerned about her safety then doing the job they were ordered to do.
  God has put in the DNA of men the desire to protect the women and children and gave us the physical bodies to do just that. Women are tougher then most men think … (try giving birth) but that does not mean that they were made to see war.
  Again in my opinion men and women are wired differently in their brains…men are like an apple computer in that our brains can compartmentalize life’s experiences and women are like Microsoft computers and have it all in a running time line. We can go and hack an invading army to pieces with a sword and come home and have war in one box and family in another. Does this mean that all men function normally after war? Obviously not but I would argue that we were made to handle it better then women.
  Most of my objection here is not “can a woman handle this” as much as it is can the army function the way it should with women in the fight and the men wanting to keep them alive through it….?
  
  Report this comment
- Favored93
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:43pm
  @The Big Mick
  You ar missing the ENTIRE point of this debate…This is not “can she handle it” vs “men can but she can’t”… This is a question of can the MEN function properly in a battle with women in the trenches?
  Women are good fighters but men have proven time and again that that protecting our women is more important then doing the job in battle.
  
  Report this comment
- SgtB
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:55am
  @ the big mick, I am a Marine and I served in a unit that was nearly 30% female. I never met one that would tell you that females in combat roles was an ideal situation and most agreed that it was wrong to put them there. They would do it in a heart beat if asked, but they knew the psychological and physical reasoning behind their absence in combat units. Oh, and just so we are all clear, they already do have separate standards for women and men. Women must meet different weight standards, physical fitness standards, and there are obviously different medical standards.
  
  Anyone know one of the last things a female Marine does before she deploys? I’ve got a clue for you, it involves peeing on a stick in front of a corpsman. There are differences between the sexes and they are not simply cosmetic. Nor are they juvenile or the product of chauvinistic thoughts. They are concrete facts. Granted, there are always exceptions and some women may be in fact stronger than some men, but the general conclusion is valid and should be acknowledged.
  
  Report this comment
- DIR
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 8:14pm
  Well I know some nasty bull lesies that could take down Hulk Hogon and rip off his head. In a bra and a thong they’d terrorize any enemy. These shemen are the exception not the rule. However, most women can hold their own and if they had too they could be formidable: i.e the Isreali armed services combat trained women. Do we, as a nation, want to have our women doing this kind of chore? Maybe as a last resort, but in general not by my standards and for a whole lot of reasons.
  
  Report this comment
- dmerwin
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 8:55pm
  Throughout the history of combat soldiers have risked their lives to protect members of their tribe, legion, squad or fire team. Medics earn a lot of heroism awards based on this thinking and their job selection. You spend enough time in the field with any one you will grow to love those who are team members and resent those who are not. Regardless of gender. We trust them to fly fighter planes and helicopters. As long as they can PHYSICALLY do the job without accommodations I see no reason to not at least trial the idea, women should be fully aware of the Pandora’s box (seems like an appropriate analogy), they are about to open.
  
  Report this comment
jerrywalters
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:44pm
And I am so glad that decisions such as these are not left in the hands of pundits like george will. Let the military handle this one george and try to remind yourself each day when you get up and look in the mirror that you are a nobody with no authority to make such decisions. What a bag of hot, useless air!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- clouviere
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 10:49am
  Are you seriously going there? The Military tried to handle this. They had rules. But Congress is over riding those rules. The Administration is over riding those rules. This isn’t the Military’s baby. If they had their way, it be only men, only straight men. And before you try to say “only white men”…the Army was fully desegregated long before it was “re-desegregated”. The Military took care of that one on their own to, just to have a useless socialist president for them to stand to and change their ways.
  
  Report this comment
TotallyNotATroll
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:39pm
I may morally disagree with sending women into combat, but I have no doubt my own daughter would charge into battle just to prove an idiotic question like this wrong. Ask Israel if they think women are capable…

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- JustJason
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:48pm
  Your daughter would never make it to “battle” cause she cant carry the 120 pound expeditionary load and have anything left over to fight.
  
  She would end up dead, captured.raped. and dead, or pregnant to get out of hell.
  
  Report this comment
- RANGER1965
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:49pm
  It’s time to debunk the myth, once and for all, that Israel’s experience with allowing women in combat was successful and, therefore, should be duplicated by the Pentagon. It wasn’t successful. It was a disaster by Israel’s own admission.
  
  “History shows that the presence of women has had a devastating impact on the effectiveness of men in battle,” wrote John Luddy in July 27, 1994, for the Heritage Foundation backgrounder.
  
  “For example, it is a common misperception that Israel allows women in combat units. In fact, women have been barred from combat in Israel since 1950, when a review of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War showed how harmful their presence could be. The study revealed that men tried to protect and assist women rather than continue their attack. As a result, they not only put their own lives in greater danger, but also jeopardized the survival of the entire unit. The study further revealed that unit morale was damaged when men saw women killed and maimed on the battlefield,” Luddy said.
  
  Writes Edward Norton, a reservist in the Israel Defense Forces: “Women have always played an important role in the Israeli military, but they rarely see combat; if they do, it is usually by accident. No one in Israel, including feminists, has any objection to this situation. The fact that the Persian Gulf War has produced calls to allow women on the front lines proves only how atypical that war was and how little Americans really understand combat.”
  
  Report this comment
- ginger100
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 12:20am
  Don’t you know, wrong is right, right is wrong, black is the new white, law abiding are the new criminals. Abandon all that you have learned and learn to think opposite
  
  Report this comment
- Wisdom7
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:24am
  You also cannot even compare the two cultures. Our culture is ENTIRELY different.
  
  Report this comment
- The_Cabrito_Goat
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 2:54pm
  Actually, our cultures are not totally separate.
  
  (we are both countries founded on the premise of religious freedom)
  
  It’s just that Israel mandates 2 years of military service for women because, it’s necessary. The only border they aren’t being attack on is the sea.
  
  Report this comment
JustJason
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:36pm
USA Military:
R and D cuts
Navy Fleets Reduced
Aircraft Reduced
Push to replace male infantry with females.

Our enemies are laughing at us.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The Big Mick
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:52pm
  Just like they laughed at those Russian Women Snipers, eh?
  Folks, have the Intellectual GUTS and INTEGRITY to READ what you are WRITING and THINK about it.
  What is piszing you OFF here has NOTHING to do with IF WOMEN CAN SHOOT! It has to do with OTHER Sociological and CULTURAL Issues which have LITTLE to do with MODERN Combat Effectiveness. Hell, DARPA already has ROBOT weight carriers, like that ExoSuit Loader in one of the Alien Sequals, IN DEVELOPMENT! How much they can CARRY DON’T MEAN SHEITE!
  Let “Little John” the 6’6 bullneck carry the extra ammo, let Susie the Sniper do the TRIGGER work if Susie is BETTER at KILLING! Didn’t you SEE that Woman Olympic Shotgunner?
  If you are worried about Capture–Don’t let the enemy WIN, or save the last bullet for your female comrade.
  You think the West was Won by POLE Dancers? We’ve known since Molly Pitcher that women can have a role in Artillery. Higher Math Scores, eh? Better G Tolerance. Some better forms of Situational Awareness.
  You have as much COGENT reason for saying “They aren’t ‘naturally capable’ as they had for saying it to the Tuskegee Airmen.
  
  Report this comment
- JustJason
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 8:03pm
  Snipers do more than pull a trigger.
  
  They cover allot distance with allot of weight.
  
  The more i see you write stuff the more I realize you either forgotten your experiences or never served.
  
  Being a sniper in your own territory, leaving home for the day with a rifle, is different than a expeditionary fighting force.
  
  Report this comment
- JustJason
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 8:11pm
  Black MEN can fight like WHITE BROWN YELLOW GREEN men.
  
  A woman cannot fight like a MAN. There is allot of work before and after pulling a trigger. Dont over simplify the work and sacrifice MEN do every day prior to and on the battlefield.
  
  Comparing this to race is not an intellectual argument that is reasonable.
  
  The female units you speak off in USSR and China were propaganda. Showcasing the falsehood of the Socialist Utopia were everyone is equal.
  
  Report this comment
JustJason
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:32pm
Israel Israel… Fing POGs talking ****. In Israel you walk out your front door and catch a ride to your post. They are not an expeditionary force. There is a expeditionary load, Combat load, Patrol loads…. They cant handle the weight and the break down in the field. It has been proven over and over. All the studies are out there. Google the reports by the navy. They had doctors and engineers determine the percentage of weight the average Marine can carry for distance without injury. All the stats are there…

The lack the upper body strength, more stress and strain on legs. Stress fractures and joint problems galore… How does this make us better as a fighting force. So sick of nasty civilians asking us, expecting us to do a thing, but then muddling in something they know nothing about.

Congrats you know a girl who works out regularly and takes a van to a shoot house and performs well. Well… Let me see her go months with sleep deprivation, op tempo that doesn’t allow for the strength training she requires to keep with the boys, and intermittent poor nutrition. They crumble… seen it.

When a man is a non hacker his life is made miserable by his peers. He either fixes himself or finds a way out of service. With women and the PC bs, everyone will ignore it and they will deploy with her. Someone will die or she will get the early home with a war zone pregnancy. Seen that many many times.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- drs1969
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 8:36pm
  You have my sympathy. tThis is why I left. The service has been ruined by politics.
  
  Report this comment
SIXFRIGATES
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:25pm
The answer is NO!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- RANGER1965
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:44pm
  Many on the Left believe that today’s fighting soldiers (Infantry, Airborne, Rangers Special Forces) are all uneducated, brainwashed, stone cold killers. They imagine the Football Jocks in high school that harrassed their sensitive souls, are now all in the Military, because they couldn’t be Journalists and College Professors like them.
  Many on the Right believe that today’s fighting soldiers are all Boy Scouts. Self Sacrificing Christian males that left divinity school to go fight Camel Jockeys to save the USA from terrorism.
  
  Since the above is relevant to this article let me clue you in. Today’s fighting forces are a bunch of hard-charging alpha males, with alot of pride. They do work that’ll make a pig puke. They are in the mud and blood for months at a time, with no break in sight. Most of them are utter professionals on the battlefield. They fear ******* up and getting a buddy killed, more than death itself! They WILL !complete the mission given them.
  But when it’s time to relax? They party like it’s 1999. These are hard chargin’ men who have faced blood and death, so they party…HARD! It’s all about drinking, fighting, and *******.
  Add women to combat arms and you will have a NIGHTMARE!
  Can some women hack it? Of course there’s always a few exceptions, but you don’t change policy over a few exceptional women. For the most part they will be given quota’s which will result in decreasing the standards.
  It is so.
  
  Report this comment
banjarmon
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:23pm
As long as they take medicine to stay in PMS women can do anything and DON’T GET IN THEIR WAY!!!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Mugatu
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 8:42pm
  Typical…
  
  Report this comment
JustJason
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:21pm
I am an old fat Marine. (38) Put me in the a room with the toughest female in the USA, only one can leave. I will crush her small pathetic skull.

Allot of money to made for fighting and being a stud. I dont see any women as defensive linebackers in the NFL. I dont see any women fighting for the big money in UFC, the money the guys get fighting guys.

Put the best female boxer against a middle weight. You know what the F will happen…

This is all ********.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- chips1
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:34pm
  You’ve never met my wife!!!!!
  
  Report this comment
- JustJason
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:45pm
  I was a MCMAP instructor fool.
  
  I fought men and women all day long. We went half speed with the female Marines and let them take us down for them to learn technique. It was a fing joke. It was a challenge to keep two men from wrecking each other. The coed match ups was make believe.
  
  I dont give a sh1t about your wife.
  
  Report this comment
- The Big Mick
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:57pm
  GOD, Jhead, THEY DON’T KILL RAH GIES by BOXING OR TACKLING THEM. THEY DO IT WITH STEEL AT A DISTANCE!
  NOTHING else makes any difference!
  
  Report this comment
- Oldmantex
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 9:32pm
  @ big Mick you clearly have no clue what you are talking about. Go back to playing soldier on your xbox and leave these conversations to men that actually have a clue. Im so sick of kids telling me about the military or war or weapons, because that can mash A or B really fast on a controller.
  
  I watched women fall out of 5 mile one way rucks and that was just marching in full gear. They didn’t have to do as many push-ups or sit-ups or run the miles as fast as the men. For every 1 girl that could do it, there were 20 that couldn’t.
  
  This is a volunteer military tell your young men there are better ways to serve and lets see how long it last with just a bunch of girls on the front lines. Remember folks these are not 30 yr old women that have birthed children and raised a family. These are 18 yr old girls that scream at spiders.
  
  Report this comment
SpankDaMonkey
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:21pm
.
We are Doomed……..

Gays, Women on the front lines. Well At least our enimeis will have a good laugh while they kick or whatever our asses……

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Fubared
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 10:31pm
  Hey Monkey, you know why it isn’t tactical for women to jump into combat?
  They whistle.
  
  Report this comment
noslave
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:06pm
after seeing all the BEAUTIES??in the democrat party,some i,d like to have my back in a bar fight??,their kick-ass amazons,they will do fine in combat?if not its a win win situation??

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Fitzzz
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:57pm
When he mentions dumbing down, he is right on the mark
Remember a while back, there were complaints about not enough blacks on the police force in certain cities, well the reason was that the blacks who applied, failed the test
So I think it was Erik Holder who lowered the score needed to pass
Now we do have more blacks, but we also have less intelligent police officers

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- thegreatcarnac
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 8:37pm
  That scenario is repeated in every P.D. and in every business in the country. The feds make a company or city or state hire ‘X’ amount of blacks. Theoretically they are to pass the same tests that whites do but they are given easier tests. I know this as a fact. Then…most cannot even pass the ‘easy’ test but they just give them a job anyway. The whole nation drops one step down on the intelligence and workplace aptitude ladder.
  
  Report this comment
- drs1969
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 8:41pm
  That should doubly scary when you read that cops already had lower than average IQ’s!
  
  Report this comment
1HonestInjun
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:47pm
I’m in favor of females being allowed in combat as long as they don’t shave their legs so to curb
their fellow male soldiers from debauchery.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
AUsername
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:43pm
you don’t have to be strong all you gotta do is shoot and run, almost anyone can do that. so of course they can.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The Big Mick
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:49pm
  no, what they got to do is HIT what they AIM at. Again I don’t care HOW they “p”. Can they KILL, GOOD! That’s all ANYbody on the SHARP end should CARE about.
  
  Report this comment
- Fubared
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:15pm
  ausername
  Ammo is huge, believe it or not to “combat” arms… Care to venture what a combat load is just for an M4? Care to venture what you would carry extra for the M249 gunner and the M240 gunner? Throw in some demo, maybe a few spare Gustovs or a go out on a limp and imagine toting a mortar, base plate, and ammo. What if you are a 203 gunner? Frags, smoke, armor. Moron comes to mind, but don’t let that stop you from postulating more.
  Forget the water and chow and hygiene and commo. So we should just forgo all that, wear some Crocs and utilize a Red Ryder huh?
  
  Report this comment
- The-Monk
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:34pm
  @AUsername
  “you don’t have to be strong all you gotta do is shoot and run…”
  
  Just a little clarification needed…..
  
  Shoot and run away or shoot and run FORWARDs???
  
  Judging from your other posts you meant “run away”……
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:44pm
  shoot and run is the strategy of the people we fight….Ours is more like sitting duck
  
  Report this comment
- Fubared
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 9:39pm
  Tofu
  Why are most bots so defeatist in attitude? Listen to some of what Ranger65 is saying if you want some insight, or doubt and sit back and wait for WangDang to tell you how he saved Fallujah 2.
  
  Report this comment
- soybomb315_II
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 11:07pm
  fubared, i dont sit around and wait for people to tell me what to think. I go find the answers.
  
  The truth is that our military is quick initially, but like every conflict, we bog down trying to nation-build. A surprisingly low number of our soldiers in the middle east have died in traditional gunfights.
  
  Report this comment
- usedCZARsalesman
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 3:57pm
  AUSERNAME…WOW, that comment makes it 100% crystal clear that you A) have NO IDEA what it is like in a war zone and B) have NO IDEA about the “shooting and running” prowess of our “fighting women”
  
  Since I have served, and spent 3 years (total) in war zones, let me educate you. In my ENTIRE MILITARY CAREER, going to literally hundreds of ranges and watching a THOUSAND or more females “qualify”, I have NEVER, NOT ONCE seen a woman shoot expert. Every range we had, at least a dozen men did (like me…every time). These weren’t special forces or anything, most of us were supply (which is why I was around so many women). Yet we still had dozens of men at every range shoot expert and NOT ONE WOMAN.
  
  Secondly, the minimum requirement for me in the 2 mile was just over 16 minutes (slower than that and you failed). For women in the SAME age group, the MAX OUT was roughly the SAME TIME!!! Every morning we ran…EVERY MORNING. So you would think, after a few months, the women would be up to par, right? WRONG! In fact, the longer we went, the higher and higher numbers of females that went to SICK CALL instead to get profiles so they could STOP BEING MADE TO RUN. All this is without the 100 lbs or so of gear that EVERY combat male wears when he is outside the wire. I’ve watched these women, IN COMBAT ZONES, literally collapse and be taken to a medic from just WALKING TO THEIR GUARD POST while wearing that equipment.
  
  In short, you’re an idiot.
  
  Report this comment
toiletclogga
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:41pm
How does the decision to allow women in combat roles strengthen our military? If this is the law of the land, and if it is inevitible, I do hope that women are serving only in all female batallions. Put a woman in to serve alongside a man, and that man is going to take extraordinary and unnecessary risks to protect the woman. Besides that, I’m not so sure Amercia is ready to see their women dying and maimed moreso than what is occuring today. This is meant to weaken our military. The left hates the military, and everything about the military.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The Big Mick
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:48pm
  I expect MY 21s Century Warfighters to be able to overcome their CaveBrained wiring to make GOOD decisions under fire. The Warriors I want on the Firing line are the ones who KILL best. I don’t care how they go potty. And if it was ME on the firing line I’d MAKE SURE I had the best killers next to me. ANYthing else ain’t even good Bullsheite, lacking both balls and substance. Meaning it is Heifer Methane.
  
  Report this comment
- The Big Mick
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:56pm
  What I (bold italic underlined for emphasis) want to see is THE DEAD AND DISMEMBERED BODIES OF MY ENEMIES, TC.
  THAT’s the WHOLE PROBLEM with America’s post “nam attitude toward NECESSARY War.
  I DON’T CARE how many of Our Guys get it JUST AS LONG AS THERE ARE SEVERAL ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE MORE BARBARIANS gettting it. That’s what it means to WIN Wars.
  I’d PREFER NONE of our Guys, male or female, get killed or maimed. But it is MORE important, MOST important that they VERY EFFICIENTLY and EFFECTIVELY KILL MASSIVELY MORE ENEMIES!!!! NOTHING else matters in War.
  Why that is so hard for folks to get is beyond me. WW2 should have taught us that forever.
  WE ARE IN A WAR for SURVIVAL against Islamacist Hegemony and La Raza Reconquista, TC.
  ALL THAT MATTERS is WIPING OUT the enemy—ALL that matters.
  WHATEVER it takes.
  
  Report this comment
- toiletclogga
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:31pm
  Agreed Mick. Unfortunately, our military is no longer a killing machine, but rather a “keeper of the peace.” Regardless of the sexual identity of those in our military, the endgame/mission should be killing, and killing effectively and efficiently without questioning why. Give it 10 years, and you’re not going to be able to identify our military.
  
  Report this comment
- drs1969
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 8:48pm
  I knew a female NYC cop who said she liked being pared w/ men better. Gee, I wonder why?!
  
  Report this comment
The Big Mick
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:29pm
COGENCY Mr. Will, in Combat the wounded soldier will often be bigger than the unwounded comrade who is the “nearest available assistance”, gender will render THAT probability only marginally greater. Which refuses to DEAL with the FACT that Women have a greater tolerence for G Forces and that SHORTER is BETTER in the Modern Cockpit. Add it certain types of eye hand coordination, problem solving and decision making there are SOME combat roles, OTHER than Infantry, for which women would make SUPERIOR Warriors. These are Peer Review STUDY based FACTS, Georgie, with your resources a little diggin should uncover them.
You are committing the Logical and Rhetorical Fallacies of Straw Man and Arguing to infinity, Georgie, at least have the guts to admit your REAL reasons for being uncomfortable with women in combat.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Wisdom7
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:32pm
  Oh look a worshiper of women. You are part of the reason men are becoming pansies.
  
  Report this comment
- The Big Mick
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:36pm
  Wisdom?
  Defend your Premise that 1. To want the Best Killers at the Sharp End. is to 2. Worship Women.
  3. Emasculate men.
  Why do EITHER of those follow from the First?
  DEMONSTRATE your logic. You got a COGENT argument, Trot it out.
  
  Report this comment
- chips1
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:55pm
  MICK:
  How many women can remain in a small space with men for 2 days and when they need to crap, they pull down their drawers and do it 6 inches from a guys face and allow him to wipe your rear? Killing is just a small bonus to being in the combat situation. You haven’t thought this out, have you?
  
  Report this comment
- Wisdom7
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:52am
  You seem to buy into the Hollywood version of women, which is also complete bull@^%*, and quite frankly I am sick of it. You know the version where women are kicking the ass of 220 pound men left and right without so much as a scratch. That doesn’t happen in real life, but we have conditioned our youth to think it is reality.
  
  I was unfortunate enough to be active duty during the Tailhook scandal and the demonizing of men in the military. I had to sit through a bull@^)* lecture and listen to how we men should not look at or talk to women. Women are not held to the same standard. They don’t have to do the same PT. They complain and get out of duty. Almost every female I knew back at command was having sex with someone, and some of them even while on duty. Hey what do you expect when you put a bunch of 18 and 20 something year old kids together. Nature takes its course. Before anyone asks, no I am not bashing women. I married a female veteran.
  
  Report this comment
progressiveslayer
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:27pm
Of course they aren’t George that’s why they’ll be put in combat roles to degrade their units effectiveness.The silly civilians will put them in ‘special forces’ and destroy them as well. I know I know I’ve heard it all before from every butch out there they can beat the hell out of any man. Sure you take a 250 lb ‘woman’ who’s basically a man with a minor glitch in a chromosome and she can handle a Barney Fife type with no problem.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The Big Mick
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:34pm
  don’t care. Modern CQB emphasizes—”use your tools” anyway, does it not?
  Can they PUT STEEL into the GUTS of my ENEMIES?
  ALL I care about, all ANYBODY, especially the guy at the sharp end, should care about.
  
  Report this comment
- Elena2010
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:48pm
  Mick — you may want to look up the Israeli study that shows women cannot handle the rigors of combat. We are smaller, have less lean muscle mass, and less cardio abilities due to less blood volume. We are NOT all built like trainer Jillian Michael, or whatever her name is.
  
  We are also no longer dealing with Western powers but w/savages out of the Arabian desert. Their first rule is to rape female captives and the men, too. A penny for the PTSD stats fm our current wars on percentages of men verses women in the combat zone who leave w/PTSD.
  
  This is just more PC-garbage being pushed on the military fm above. Working officers and senior enlisted will be forced to make it work, but it won’t. Mid-level heads will roll, and people will die, but it won’t solve any problems.
  
  Make sure your Congressional reps hear fm you — “it’s the economy stupid!” Every other thing is just a distraction.
  
  Report this comment
- Fubared
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:18pm
  Elena
  Well said all around. And I loooove women, just situation dictates, not pogues and remfs like we are seeing with this push.
  
  Report this comment
- The Big Mick
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:42pm
  Elana 6:48. No doubt you are right that 1. Some, or even MOST, woman cannot, “handle the rigors” of SOME things physiologially, BUT it does not THEN follow that NONE CAN. Neither have you addressed the fitness of Female Warriors in NON Infantry Arms. Most importantly, the Dark Age Barbarians like raping MEN to—YOU look up Bacha Bazi Boy. The Rape of Female Prisoners has, as I have stated at 6:33 to COUYON, has NOTHING to do with whether or not SOME women would make more Efficient Killers.
  THAT argument is NOT, as Will’s is, unsuitability due to smaller physiology, but something ELSE alltogether.
  I WANT the BEST KILLERS, to care about anything else is to NOT Care about WINNING ENOUGH.
  
  Report this comment
- chips1
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 8:36pm
  You just want to kill anything and everything. That was Jeffery Dahlmers thought process. There are many ways to win. Your one sick puppy.
  
  Report this comment
scrapadapolis
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:24pm
Add your comments

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
scrapadapolis
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:19pm
Also the question of getting pregnant during serving in combat.Do they get sent home?Is their service suspended until they can return to work?(M-leave).I say sure let them into combat.But get pregnant while in combat and you go to levenworth for 5 years.I have a feeling some women will embrace combat but others will try and get pregnant because their afraid after getting a taste of death in the field.Then cry foul.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The Big Mick
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:31pm
  let’s try it an see, S’crap.
  If a pregnant girl can kill more rah aggies I WANT her.
  
  Report this comment
- gyro
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:58pm
  never piss off a pregnant woman
  
  Report this comment
- Rowgue
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:02pm
  Women do get punished for getting pregnant while actively deployed or on duty. I saw more than one get dishonorably discharged for it.
  
  Report this comment
DougHuffman
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:19pm
So does Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Preparedness.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
RJJinGadsden
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:18pm
Okay, I am not familiar with the physical fitness tests of all of the services, but I am very familiar with what the Army’s standards were up until I retired 16 years ago. At least for the Army, I have one suggestion to settle this whole argument. Make the APFT card blank on one side.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Couyon64
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:17pm
Women are more than strong enough for combat. They also make an extremely valuable hostage taget for media attention. That’s why I’m against it. Imagine a female American Soldier taken hostage on al gorejazzera.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- The Big Mick
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:33pm
  I would want the Perps burned and their kin wiped out, their Country utterly destroyed.
  But then I’d want that for a Male Prisoner of the Dark Age Barbarian KLANbangers too.
  No validity to the argument, Cou.
  
  Report this comment
- A Hoosier Says
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 9:20pm
  Ever heard of Jessica Lynch?
  
  Report this comment
The Big Mick
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:17pm
Ok, Class.
You are surrounded by Dark Age Barbarians trying to kill you. Whom do you want with you? A beer drinkin skirt chasing All Male Hormone “bro” OR
The Most Efficient and Effective KILLER you can get, whether they pee sitting down or not be damned?
My Military Exists SOLELY to KILL the POS who try to EFF with Me and Mine, I want those with Proven Ability to KILL quickly, efficiently, effectively, and without mercy to be the ones doing it. Don’t care what ELSE they can do, how much they can lift, ANYTHING. Can they put STEEL INTO THE BODIES of my ENEMIES, FASTER and MORE DEADLY than ANYBODY ELSE?
NOTHING else matters.
For a Smart Guy Willie can be a real idiot sometimes.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Wisdom7
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:35pm
  Yeah sorry. I am not buying your bull@#%*. I’ve read your posts. You’re trying too hard and giving yourself away.
  
  Report this comment
- usedCZARsalesman
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 7:59pm
  BIG MICK…I’m going to guess that you have never served? In my time in the military (including two tours in Iraq) I noticed 3 things about women in the military…
  
  1) I NEVER, in my entire career, met ONE SINGLE woman that shot expert at a qualifying range. Not once…EVER
  
  2) the MINIMUM requirement for men in the push-up and the run was the same as the MAX OUT requirement for women in the same age group.
  
  3) at nearly a statistical ZERO, military women CANNOT drag a full grown man’s “dead weight”. Out of the 100 plus women I saw attempt a “buddy carry” (of ANY kind, to include just straight dragging) I have only ever met ONE military women that could get a grown man off a battle field.
  
  This is a MORONIC argument. Women really have no business in the military AT ALL outside of paperwork. In combat, however, it’s not only a bad idea, it’s DANGEROUS to the men around them.
  
  Report this comment
Wisdom7
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:15pm
““I’ve met a lot of combat medics, who repel down, who pick up big 6’4” marines, and take ‘em to safety. I just interviewed a woman,” Raddatz responded.”

Oh please. This is where you ask “Oh really? A lot you say? How many? Who were they? Repel down? Repel down what?”

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- MK75Gunner
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 9:52pm
  No doubt. It’s funny how these libs always have some fictional character that supports their beliefs that they “just talked to”. For once I want somebody to call them out and say “********, give me a name and let me interview ‘em”.
  
  Report this comment
- Wisdom7
  Posted on January 28, 2013 at 1:30am
  Yet it never happens! I mean honestly why didn’t he call her on that bs?!
  
  Report this comment
FANGS
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:14pm
No American will prortect America under a Commumnist Dictator.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- drs1969
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 8:57pm
  That’s right! They expect a lot of men to quit very soon, maybe they started leaving in Nov.?
  
  Report this comment
Sanitysaint01
Posted on January 27, 2013 at 6:14pm
I think that this is completely revelant. I am a woman, and a strong one at that, but the standards should NOT be taken down to accomodate women. I would think that it would be okay to have women in the military if they don’t meet the physical standards if it is not a physical job they will be doing. Some women would have the strength to haul such a large man, but only they should be there on the front lines.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- drs1969
  Posted on January 27, 2013 at 9:00pm
  Too late! The standards were lowered in the 1970′s, after the draft ended, to fill the void.
  
  Report this comment

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.